Skip Menu |

Preferred bug tracker

Please visit the preferred bug tracker to report your issue.

This queue is for tickets about the HTTP-Tiny CPAN distribution.

Report information
The Basics
Id: 77750
Status: resolved
Priority: 0/
Queue: HTTP-Tiny

People
Owner: Nobody in particular
Requestors: PHIPS [...] cpan.org
Cc:
AdminCc:

Bug Information
Severity: Wishlist
Broken in: 0.022
Fixed in: (no value)



Subject: Add proxy auth support
Hi, Would it be possible to add authenticating proxy support please? The http_proxy env variable supports http://user:password@proxy:port/ format, it would be great if HTTP::Tiny did too. Thanks!
Subject: Re: [rt.cpan.org #77750] Add proxy auth support
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 09:04:07 -0400
To: bug-HTTP-Tiny [...] rt.cpan.org
From: David Golden <dagolden [...] cpan.org>
There is no authentication support at all right now, so that would be a precursor to this. Doing authentication well in a way consistent with the Tiny philosophy is not obvious to me and thus hasn't been written. I suggest people need to step up to LWP for this. David On Jun 11, 2012 6:53 AM, "Mark Phillips via RT" <bug-HTTP-Tiny@rt.cpan.org> wrote: Show quoted text
> Mon Jun 11 06:53:07 2012: Request 77750 was acted upon. > Transaction: Ticket created by PHIPS > Queue: HTTP-Tiny > Subject: Add proxy auth support > Broken in: 0.022 > Severity: Wishlist > Owner: Nobody > Requestors: PHIPS@cpan.org > Status: new > Ticket <URL: https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=77750 > > > > Hi, > > Would it be possible to add authenticating proxy support please? The > http_proxy env variable supports http://user:password@proxy:port/ > format, it would be great if HTTP::Tiny did too. > > Thanks! >
Thanks for the feedback David. My driver for requesting this is because it's the default module used by newer CPANs - so when I recently perlbrew'd 5.14, CPAN tried to use HTTP::Tiny, but I'm sat in a large corporate behind an authenticating proxy. It would be great if HTTP::Tiny supported proxy auth for this reason, really. Cheers
If any of the existing CPAN client's prefer HTTP::Tiny over LWP, I would consider that a bug. HTTP::Tiny was designed to be a lightweight alternative to bootstrap CPAN clients, not replacing existing HTTP implementations as LWP. If we decide to add auth support we would end up with code duplicating LWP which was not the original idea. Adding support for Base64 authentication is simple, next would be Digest md5 authentication and next would be windows users would ask for NTLM authentication. __ chansen
Shipped in 0.040